Adolescents’ Gadget Addiction and Family Functioning - PDF document

Effects of Playingwithadget oElementary School Children in Urban and Rural Environment Ariani ArianiNi Luh PutuRichi Aditya, Novi Endriyaniand Rusdian NiatiDepartment of PediatricsMedical FacultyUniversity of Brawijaya, Indonesia : Advances in Health Sciences Research (AHSR), volume 2 22 Health Science International Conference (HSIC 2017) This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Copyright © 2017, the Authors. Published by Atlantis Press. Physical environment has been an interest of public health research in the past decade.Numerous studies had been published regarding environmental attributes and their associationwith children’s behaviour(Krizek, Birnbaum,Levinson)Theurban area is defined as the region surrounding a citywhich isdeveloped, meaningthere is a density of human structures such as houses, commercial buildings, roads, bridges,etc. Rural area is a geographic areathat is located outside towns and citiesTypical rural areashave a low population density and small settlements.Environmental association with behaviour and the use of gadgetin adults is not applicable to childrenSjolieThueIn contrast, hildren and adolescence represent uniqueparts of the life course that are particularly important in the development of lifelong behaviorpatterns. Children nowadays start using gadgets in a very early age. They are exposed to digital devices since infancy. Video games may have just as much of a psychological effect as physical effect. A US based study indicated a strong relationship between adolescents who played a high number of video games, their aggressive behaviour with teachers and peers, and their poor performance in school. Exposure to violent games may have led to growth in negative behaviorFerguson, This study correlates the relationship of rural and urban environment, children’s behavioural tendency and the use of gadget in children. Most children in urban and rural areas start using gadget in the first years of life but not all children develop the same behavioural tendency in the use of gadget. METHODThis was cross sectional study. We used questionnaire to collect the data. Children aged 712 years were recruited from primary schools fromurban and rural areas using stratified randm sampling. Subjects comprised boys and girls, from urban and rural areas in Malanf, East Java, Indonesia.Questionnaire tools was divided into three parts: positive and negative behavior, vironment(family, school), and gadget recall. Participants were asked to give their answer by choosing one of the most suitable answer provided. Each answers were converted into score and then being calculated.The correlation between variables were assessed using logistic regression test. Hosmer and Lemeshow Test were used to assess the goodness-of-fit of the data. Data was considered statistically significant if value RESULT AND DISCUSSION Based on the questionnaire result, we applied Hosmer and Lemeshow Test to assess the goodnessfit of the data. Then we assess R square Nagelkerke to calculate the predictivepowerTable 1 presents the socio demographic profileof thestudyparticipants with mean age ± 10.3 y.o. The mean (±SD) of age start using gadget was y.o.Overall, 3.4% subjects had started using gadget in less than 2 y.0, % subjects had started using gadget in 2 until 5 y.o, and % were more than 5 y.o. In addition, % of the subjects reported �2 hours/day of total gadgets usage duration, exceeding the international recommendation of 2 hours/day of screen time. 23 Table 1 Baseline Characteristics Of Participants Variables Groups n % Age in years 10 y.o 154 44 �10 y.o 201 56 School Location Urban 293 82 Rural 62 18 Sex Male 188 52 Female 167 48 Duration using gadget 1 hour 93 26,5 1 - 2 hours 214 60 �2 hours 48 13,5 Age start using gadget 2 y.o 12 3.4 2 - 5 y.o 106 29.9 �5 y.o 237 66.8 Environment and Behavioural Tendencies The data in Ta ble 2 shows that o f all children who have a positive envir onment, as many as 65.1% have a tendency of n egative behaviour . Of all the children with negative environments, only 34.9% experie nced negative tendency behaviour . T he correlation be tween e nvironmen t and b ehavio u r is statistically significant ( p = 0.008) . Table 2 Correlation Between Environment And Behavioural Tendencies Environmental Tendency Total (%) p value Positi ve (%) Negati ve (%) Behavioural Tendency Positi ve 214 5 5 2 69 0.008 ( 79 .3 ) ( 20.7 ) ( 100 ) Negati ve 56 30 86 ( 65.1 ) ( 34.9 ) ( 100 ) Total 270 8 5 35 5 ( 75.8 ) ( 24. 2) ( 100 ) School Location and Behavioural Tendencies In Table 3, the children who attended elementary schoolin urban area, 90.7% had a egative behavioraltendencyand of all the children in elementary schoollocated in rural area, only 9.3% experienced negative behavioratendencies.The result ofanalysis obtained which indicate that correlation between elementary schoollocation and behaviorr is statistically significantand correlation value 0,110 show positive orrelationTable 3 Correlation Between School Location And Behavioural Tendencies Variable s School Location Total (%) p value Correlation value Urban Area(%) Rural area (%) Behavioural Tendency Positi ve 219 51 270 0.037 0 .110 ( 81.1 ) ( 18.9 ) ( 100 ) Negati ve 7 7 8 8 5 ( 90.7 ) ( 9.3 ) ( 100 ) Total 29 6 59 35 5 ( 83.4 ) ( 16.6 ) ( 100 ) The Relationshipof Environment and Negative Behaviourbased onAge Usingget 24 According to Table 4, age using gadgets have a statistically significant effect on negative behavior, while environmental variables have statistically effects on negativebehaviourChildren living in positive environments are 1.529 times less likely to behave negatively than children living in negative environments. Children who startusinggadgets at year are potentially to have negative behaviour0.19 times compared to children who start using gadgets at age-18; 5years. Children who start gadgets at 25 years of age have the potential to behave negatively 0.198 times compared to children who start using gadgets at age-18; 5years.Table 4 Analysis Of Logistic Regression Of Relationship Between Environment And Negative Behaviour Based On Age Using Gadget Variables OR 95% CI p value Behavioural Tendency Positive 1.529 0.008 Negative 0.854 - 2.738 Age using Gadget 2 y.o 0.190 0.056 - 0.645 0.000 2 - 5 y.o 0.198 0.116 0.339 �5 y.o 0.190 0.055 - 0.544 The Relationship of Environmental Influence and Negative Behavior Based on the Duration of Using GadgetIn Table 5, all the variables have a statistically significant effect on negative behaviorThe datashown belowis the estimate parameter table. Children living in positive environments are times less likely to behave negatively than children living in negative environments. Children who play gadgets for day potentially behave negatively 0.337 times compared to children who start using gadgets forက 2hours /day, but the difference between playing gadget length is not statistically significant with ကp 0.05. Children who play the gadget for 12 hours/day potentially have negative behavior0.112 times compared to children who started using the gadget forက 2 hours / day.Table 5 Analysis Of Logistic Regression Between Environmental Influence And Negative Behaviour Based On The Duration Of Using Gadget Variables Environment n (%) OR 95% CI P V alue Positive Negative Behavioural Tendency Positive 214 (79.3) 55 (20.7) 2.23 1 .269 3.919 0. Negative 56 (65.1) 30 (34.9) 1 hour 0.337 0.092 1.233 0.100 1 - 2 hours 0.112 0.033 0.380 0.000 �2 hours . . . The Relationship of Environmentand Negative Behaviorased on Game Typehere is statistically significant effect oftype of gadget game to the negative behaviorChildren living in positive environments are 1.604 times less likely to behave negatively than children living in negative environments. Children who watchedmovieshavethe most potentially negativbehaviour (OR 9,94 25 Table 6 The Relationship Of Environment And Negative Behaviour Based On Games Type Variables Environment n (%) OR 95% CI P Value Positive Negative Behavioural Tendency Positive 214 (79.3) 55 (20.7) 1.604 0. 8 92 2.884 0.115 . Negative 56 (65.1) 30 (34.9) Types of Gadget Game Puzzle 0.455 0.217 - 0.950 0.036 War / Battle 0.516 0.218 - 1.220 0.132 Soccer 2.449 0.298 - 20.131 0.405 Music 1.895 0.408 - 8.796 0.415 Youtube 8.762 8.762 - 8.76 2 . Movies 9.947 0.000 0. 03 8 Others 5.492 0.714 42.220 0.102 In our study, all of children (100%) in urban and rural use the gadget in their daily living for two hours or more. From the results of this study concluded that the urban environment has a tendency bad influence on childrenthan in rural areas.Nowadays, naturerelated activities were less common in elementary school childrenMaster, Kaur, Narasimhan, Nadeem, Ali,Shaik2016); LoucaidesC.A., ChedzoyS.M. Bennett, N, Children who lives in rural area experienced more actvities than those who lives in n areas.Children who lives in positive environment have tendencies to behave negative behaviourLoucaideset al., DavidFerdon, &Hertz.The study pre that negative behaviour can occur when the children exposed gadget too early in their lives, especially when they watch movies rather than playing games. This may be due to negative impact of the content of movies that the children still cannot distinguish which is good and rightthey tend to watch alone without a parental assistance.CONCLUSION There was significant differences between urban and rural area in affecting children behaviourand the use of gadget. Urban areaand age onset using gadget ad more tendencies to cause children to have negative behaviourand misuse of gadgetWatching movies is more dangerous than playing games and other games. Residentalenvironment is very influential on the formation of child behaviorFurther studies were needed as there aremany other environmental attributes which could affect behaviourand the use of gadget, especially in children.ACKNOWLEDGEMENT This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not--profit sectors.REFERENCES American Academy of Pediatrics. (2013). Policy statement: children, adolescents, and the media.” Pediatrics: 132(5):pp. 958961. 26 Badri, M., Alnuaimi, A., Al Rashedi, A., Yang, G., & Temsah, K. (2016). School children’s use of digital devices, social media and parental knowledge and involvementthe case of Abu Dhabi. Education and Information Technologies. p.1-20. Brown, A. (2011). Media use by children younger than 2 years. Pediatricsvol.128(5), Christakis, D.A. (2014). Interactive media use at younger than the age of 2 years: time to rethink the American Academy of Pediatrics guideline. JAMA Pediatrvol.168(5): p David-Ferdon, C., & Hertz, M.F. (2007). Electronic media, violence, and adolescents: an erging public health problem. J Adolesc Health. Vol.41(6 Suppl 1): pp.15. Ferguson, Christopher J. (2015). Do angry birds make for angry children? A meta-analysis of video game influences on children’s and adolescents’ aggression, mental health, prosocial behaviour, and academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Sciencevol.10.5 : p 646-666. Goh, W., Bay, S., & Chen, V. (2015). Young school children’s use of digital devices and parental rules. Telematics and Informatics, vol. 32: 787795. Krizek, K.J., Birnbaum, A.S. & Levinson, D.M. A Schematic for Focusing on Youth in Investigations of Community Design and Physical Activity. The Science of Health Promotion. vol. 19: 1, p. 33-38. Livingstone S. (2012). Children’s use of mobile phones – an international comparisonJapan: The GSM Association, Mobile Society Research Institute, NTT DOCOMO Inc. Loucaides, C.A., Chedzoy, S.M. & Bennett, N. (2004). Differences in physical activity levels between urban and rural school children in CyprusHealthEducation Research Theory & Practice, vol. 19 no. 2, pp. 138Master, M.K., Kaur, C.P., Narasimhan, A, Nadeem, M., Ali, M., & Shaik, R.B., (2016). Impact of electronic gadgets on psychological behaviour of middle school children in UAE. Gulf Medical Journal.vol. 5(S2): p.54-60. Radesky, J.S., Schumacher, J., & Zuckerman, B. (2015). Mobile and interactive media use by young children: the good, the bad, and the unknown. Pediatrics: 135(1). Roseberry, S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R.M. (2014). Skype me, Socially contingent interactions help toddlers learn language. Child Dev, vol.85(3):956Roser K., Schoeni A., Foerster M. & Röösli M. (2016). Problematic mobile phone use of Swiss adolescents: is it linked with mental health or behaviour?”. J Public HealthVol. 61(3):307315. Sjolie, A.N. & Thuen, F. (2002). School journeys and leisure activities in rural and urban adolescents in Norway. Health Promotion International, vol. 17 no. 1, p. 2130. Wartella, E., Rideout, V., Lauricella, A.R. & Connell, S.L. (2013). Parenting in the age of digital technology: a national survey. Center on Media and Human Development, School of Communication, Northwestern University. June. Yoo, Y.S., Cho O.H., & Cha K.S. (2014). Associations between overuse of the internet and mental health in adolescents. Nurs. Health Sci, vol.16(2): p 193 200,. 27